Forum Help

If you want to ask about changing your username, have login problems, have password problems or a technical issue please email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

Posting help:

If you want to ask why a word can't be typed, your signature's been changed, or a post has been deleted see the Forum Rules. If you don't find the answer you can ask forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com though due to volumes we can't guarantee replies.

Login to MSE Forum

Join the MSE Forum

Skimlinks adds tracking to some, primarily retailers' links, to show they come from this forum. For some retailers, instead of using Skimlinks to turn the link into a tracked link, we use affiliated links set up through other third parties. Then if it generates revenue from that, this site is paid. The links don't change the content, or what you see or track individual data ? but they do help fund this free forum. So we hope you choose to switch it on. See the full Skimlinks factsheet for more.

I have had a quote from a builder to refurbish my upstairs bathroom. He seem like he knows what he is talking about.

In his quote he has stated the need to remove a soil pipe that connects the toilet. Trouble is, he said this may be tricky as would need to possibly cut the wall in the kitchen to be able to remove it - it is covered by a wall due to kitchen extension!!

He suggests labour for this alone would be around 1050 (not sure why the extra 50!)

Does anyone have any knowledge or experience of this kind of issue. I have googled iron soil pipes and see that there are connectors available. Builder says though that unless replaced, then the toilet would need to be raised (like current one is somehow) and would not be able to guarantee no leaks if not done properly!

There maybe no need to replace the existing soil stack if it is sound and in good order, if that WC pan is staying i would be inclined to try a bent multikwik connection to join it to the existing soil first as it looks to me from that photo to be a straight one they have used which is probably going to leak in the not to distant future if not already. If the WC is gonna suit a bent multikwik i would be wirebrushing that iron soil pipe and painting it when the WC is out.

The cold feed defo needs altering as it is probably taking 30 mins or more to fill the cistern, maybe a bent ballifix valve in place of that straight one.

Edit
One other thing that is annoying me about that photo is if they have tiled round the WC pan, it seems to be as it looks like black grout on the delph (very sloppy even if not) , the difference in height between being on the floor or on top of the tiling could also help with not having to replace your soil stack. I would be asking a plumber about all this and not a builder.

SO need again to get it done from scratch which is what the cowboy did. Believe it or not!

SO my Q really was about why the need to replace/remove cast iron soil pipes if there are connectors out there. Only like I said, my piping is hidden by a kitchen extension so a lot more work involved to replace. But if needs must.

Why is it that these old pipes of cast iron are not favored any more anyway. Arent they much better than plazzy plastic?

Cast iron is difficult to work with and most people don't have the skills or time to deal with it properly. It also cracks easily, so if you aren't careful and lucky the job can suddenly get much bigger and more expensive. You can only make a 'proper' CI joint with a socket of the kind in your picture, jointing plain pipe these days usually involves a rubber coupler held in place by jubilee clips. It is what an experienced CI plumber would consider a bodge.

There is no certainty of getting a leak-proof seal, there is no certainty how long the rubber will last, and also no certainty that the CI pipe hasn't fractured in a hidden location.

If you start getting smelly water leaking into your walls you won't be a happy customer, with the risk of return visits to try to improve what will always be a bit of a bodge.

Replacing the whole stack with uPVC almost guarantees a leak free long-lasting solution.

If you were asking me to quote then I'd want to do the full replacement too, or else politely decline the invitation. However, as Wookey suggests, it might be possible to avoid work on the stack by simply using the right kind of connector.

Each Penny
Hi and thanks. I'm probably going to go with having it replaced, despite one chap who I had round saying they could cut it back and connect it to WC still. Thinking if I have it done with uPVC like you say, it will not be prone to the cracks and need to cause havoc if ever I have to replace.

Just a quick one though, in your view, is the quote of 1050 pounds realistic and reasonable. The company is charging this plus 2k for labour for the actual subsequent bathroom refit.

The materials needed for the new stack won't cost a fortune, what will be expensive is getting access to the existing one, which sounds difficult in your case if it is built into the wall. It should go without saying, but just in case... the new stack should be boxed in with access points, rather than being buried back in the wall.

To be honest I've got no idea of a reasonable cost for doing the work - without seeing it in detail it is difficult to know what the job involves. The best bet is to get at least three quotes and go with the cheapest one, unless it is suspiciously lower than the others.

If you feel £1050 is too much then either it is, or the job involves more work than you expect - the second and third quotes will usually confirm which it is.

Do you know from your experience if this is a job that would require me to inform local council. I am in a London borough. I have emailed and asked and they say yes but I get the impression from their email that they are saying yes as I have asked and it can be some easy money for them. In fact they say my application fee would be dependent on what the buiider quotes me for the work. An application is an application I would have thought. Not a percentage of whayt I pay to get something done.

The soil stack and drainage system are covered by building regulations. The rules are quite complex and designed to reduce the risk of blockages and leakage which are things the homeowner obviously doesn't want

If building regulations approval is needed then the fee structure is based on the cost of the work - the logic being larger more expensive projects will require more time to check the plans and inspect. Building Control are not just saying 'yes' or 'no' to an idea, they have to look at the details and confirm the completed work conforms to the regulations.

Personally I think the fee structure is nuts. It discriminates against people who want to do DIY in their own home and encourages work to be done without any involvement of building control. Many 'professional' builders will do work without any building control involvement, and not comply with building regulations. A homeowner who wants to do the job (lawfully) themselves has to pay a substantial fee. The homeowner has more incentive than the dodgy builder to do the job properly and safely, but gets a financial 'penalty' for doing the right thing.

I feel there should be more effort put into educating people on the standards and reasons for them - the regulations are impossible for a layperson to understand, which is why 'professional' builders get away with all kinds of dodgy work.

Thanks again EachPEnny. Your replies are a great insight for me and I really do appreciate your honest unbiased opinion which is what I need. One more thing then if I may, you say the soil stack is covered by Building Regs. If I were to go with Builder Number 2 who says he can cut back the soil pipe to the wall in the bathroom and use an attachment, is this something that I can have done without the need for costly council asessments and auhority? The soil stack is what is at the base of the house somewhere right?

How this site works

We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of the site. We're a journalistic website and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques, but can't guarantee to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.

This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances and remember we focus on rates not service.

We don't AS a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned (how likely they are to go bust), but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the section 75 guide for protection tips).

We often link to other websites, but we can't be responsible for their content.

Always remember anyone can post on the MSE forums, so it can be very different from our opinion.

MoneySavingExpert.com is part of the MoneySupermarket Group, but is entirely editorially independent. Its stance of putting consumers first is protected and enshrined in the legally-binding MSE Editorial Code.